Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD to Launch 95 Watt FX-8300 CPU

By - Source: Xbit Labs | B 64 comments

AMD is expected to launch its FX-8300 8-core processor tomorrow.

The new CPU will run at 3.30/4.20 GHz and is able to reach the clock speed of the flagship FX-8350 (4.0/4.2 GHz). However, the new FX-8300 will only be rated at a TDP of 95 watts, versus a TDP of 125 watts for all but one other 8-core FX processors.

FX-8300 joins the FX-8100 in the 95 watt TDP spot, but promises a performance upgrade from the 8100's 3.1/3.7 GHz spec. Not surprisingly, the 8300 will be based on Piledriver cores with a total of 8 MB L2 and 8 MB L3 cache.

Xbit Labs reports that the FX-8300 will debut in Japan for 16,980 yen, or about $197. Given its performance upgrade over the 8100 into the range of the 8350, as well as its power advantage over the 8350, AMD is likely to position the CPU as a premium product and the highest price among all FX processors. The FX-8350 currently carries a tray price of $195 and street prices of about $190, which means that the FX-8300 is likely to check in at close to $200.

Display 64 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 26 Hide
    flexxar , December 31, 2012 12:32 PM
    apache_livesummmm you do know the i7 3770k is a 77w chip, and even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive right?more positive news means there tweaking the process some more, squeezing more out of it -- a few reviews will see whether this will increase the overclock-ability or hamper it


    What are your sources for "even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive"? In Tom's fx8350 review, they showed it beating the new i5 3570 in 6 out of 11 applications.
  • 19 Hide
    apache_lives , December 31, 2012 10:01 AM
    lostmyclan95 watts I want. Time to sell the 3770k and move to piledriver


    ummmm you do know the i7 3770k is a 77w chip, and even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive right?

    more positive news means there tweaking the process some more, squeezing more out of it -- a few reviews will see whether this will increase the overclock-ability or hamper it
  • 18 Hide
    mikenygmail , December 31, 2012 11:37 AM
    Go AMD, keep up the good with with new APU's and CPU's in PC's, laptops, tablets and everything else! :) 
Other Comments
  • 19 Hide
    apache_lives , December 31, 2012 10:01 AM
    lostmyclan95 watts I want. Time to sell the 3770k and move to piledriver


    ummmm you do know the i7 3770k is a 77w chip, and even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive right?

    more positive news means there tweaking the process some more, squeezing more out of it -- a few reviews will see whether this will increase the overclock-ability or hamper it
  • -1 Hide
    machvelocy , December 31, 2012 10:08 AM
    If it can reach the same turbo as the 8350, isn't it mean that it is just an underclocked 8350? Why more expensive then?
  • 7 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , December 31, 2012 10:12 AM
    95w sounds great but not if you have to pay a premuim for it.
  • 15 Hide
    atavanhalen , December 31, 2012 10:12 AM
    machvelocyIf it can reach the same turbo as the 8350, isn't it mean that it is just an underclocked 8350? Why more expensive then?


    Read the article!
  • 3 Hide
    ronch79 , December 31, 2012 10:22 AM
    That's a picture of an FX-8150. I'd rather they just put the FX logo instead of it, because it makes it look like this article was put together in a hurry, or the author is too lazy to get a proper picture to put in it.
  • 17 Hide
    halcyon , December 31, 2012 10:56 AM
    While I'd choose Intel right now because I'm a performance fan-boy above anything else (money comes...money goes) I'm glad to see AMD is still in there and that they're not giving up.
  • 18 Hide
    mikenygmail , December 31, 2012 11:37 AM
    Go AMD, keep up the good with with new APU's and CPU's in PC's, laptops, tablets and everything else! :) 
  • 13 Hide
    Cryio , December 31, 2012 11:42 AM
    Better but not enough.

    AMD, step your game up!
  • 7 Hide
    crisan_tiberiu , December 31, 2012 11:50 AM
    I dont agree with people saying that :Intel eats AMD piledriver alive", I have a 2600k and want to build another rig, and its going to be AMD (fx 4300 probably).
  • -4 Hide
    digiex , December 31, 2012 12:00 PM
    I already read this news 4 days ago.
  • 18 Hide
    Soda-88 , December 31, 2012 12:31 PM
    crisan_tiberiuI dont agree with people saying that :Intel eats AMD piledriver alive", I have a 2600k and want to build another rig, and its going to be AMD (fx 4300 probably).

    That would be a terrible downgrade
  • 26 Hide
    flexxar , December 31, 2012 12:32 PM
    apache_livesummmm you do know the i7 3770k is a 77w chip, and even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive right?more positive news means there tweaking the process some more, squeezing more out of it -- a few reviews will see whether this will increase the overclock-ability or hamper it


    What are your sources for "even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive"? In Tom's fx8350 review, they showed it beating the new i5 3570 in 6 out of 11 applications.
  • 15 Hide
    gaborbarla , December 31, 2012 12:38 PM
    lostmyclan95 watts I want. Time to sell the 3770k and move to piledriver


    LOL. I was literally in tears. Phew. Good laugh.
  • 2 Hide
    serendipiti , December 31, 2012 12:56 PM
    How overclocks?
    Does the 95W TDP mean stepping improvements or simply is able to cope with top speeds based on usage scenario (which is handled by the CPU itself to keep it under the 95W TDP).
    Under heavy load and benchmarks (probably unrealistic, or at least not representative of normal usage) you should see a difference, but in everyday tasks should be as fast as the 125W...
    But if all AMD can get out is a new tuning of its chips... probably lot (aka the rest) of AMD fans will be disappointed...
  • -4 Hide
    Anonymous , December 31, 2012 1:10 PM
    flexxarWhat are your sources for "even the old i5 2500k stock eats those AMD's alive"? In Tom's fx8350 review, they showed it beating the new i5 3570 in 6 out of 11 applications.


    True Heavily threaded it can win in some applications, but gaming shows the 3570K as the faster chip for that purpose.

    But when I OC my 3570k it leaves the FX8350 far behind. at 4.5Ghz, there is simply nothing the FX8350 can do to keep up, and it uses way more power than the 3570k as well, especially once you OC it!

    Nope, honestly, the 3570k is definately the better buy no-matter which way you look at it, shame really, loved my 1055t, it ran so sweet at 4.2Ghz and was plenty fast, i really want AMD to do better!
  • 13 Hide
    crisan_tiberiu , December 31, 2012 1:10 PM
    Soda-88That would be a terrible downgrade

    I said another rig and i didnt say that i am going to trow away my main ^-


  • 10 Hide
    alidan , December 31, 2012 1:12 PM
    amd only lags behind the intel because on single core applications, intel owns it.
    however sooner or later, we will go into the world of threaded applications, and that is where amd has a damn good chance to shine.

    me personally, i would probably go amd over intel, but nothing under a pile driver with 8 "cores"

    i would bank on future applications, and what i have heard, and that is that when using allot of crap at once, amd feels better than intel.

    more or less, the new 8350 and 8300 should be better than my phenom II 955 at stock for many things, and i dont have a need to push games to their limits either, so the bottlenecks there dont bother me to much.
  • 3 Hide
    azraa , December 31, 2012 1:26 PM
    moriconTrue Heavily threaded it can win in some applications, but gaming shows the 3570K as the faster chip for that purpose.But when I OC my 3570k it leaves the FX8350 far behind. at 4.5Ghz, there is simply nothing the FX8350 can do to keep up, and it uses way more power than the 3570k as well, especially once you OC it!Nope, honestly, the 3570k is definately the better buy no-matter which way you look at it, shame really, loved my 1055t, it ran so sweet at 4.2Ghz and was plenty fast, i really want AMD to do better!


    Then, turn of the second core of every module, you get 4 cores, and enough headroom to overclock at 5ghz no sweat, you know it has been done.
    It just needs some tinkering. The old bulldozer traded punches with the 2500k back in the day with this mod applied. I suppose it is similar today with 8350 and 3570k. You just dont pay the premium branding and get more versatility.
  • 2 Hide
    gaborbarla , December 31, 2012 1:27 PM
    alidanamd only lags behind the intel because on single core applications, intel owns it.however sooner or later, we will go into the world of threaded applications, and that is where amd has a damn good chance to shine.


    I would love to see it sooner, but knowing a bit about programming myself I know how difficult it is to implement most algorithms on multiple threads so I think it will be later.
Display more comments